Vancouver's EcoDensity Initiative Takes Next Step

Brent Toderian's picture

 In an earlier post, I wrote about how the EcoDensity Initiative here in Vancouver has been transforming the public dialogue about density ( ). Since then, over autumn, the conversations have intensified, with Vancouverites from all perspectives weighing in. Just Google "ecodensity" for a flavour of what's being written, in media, articles, and blogs, etc. The community is very aware and engaged in this important initiative, and that's a great thing. 

It's clear, not everyone feels that change in Vancouver is necessary, and some have spoken about the "price" of EcoDensity. Some are passionate in their belief that additional density, for whatever reason, may diminish the city's existing quality of life, and certainly their own. Some worry that change will come in the same form everywhere, such as high rise towers, and only market condos. They worry it will come without the public amenity and transit that makes neighbourhoods work better for more people. They ask "how do we know it will be "eco", and not just more density?" They comment on profit for developers, and pressures on existing houses around gentrification and affordability. They question how we'll still have a diverse social and income mix? Will everything look the same, or will a neighbourhood's special design character still be respected? They wonder if they will be heard, before more detailed decisions are made. And yes, they worry about important details in their lives, like sunlight on their private gardens.  

To some, these concerns are reasons to oppose change, or at least to want it to slow down substantially.  

Many other neighbours though, seem to see their neighbourhood's future differently. They may share similar concerns, but have told us that they believe meaningful change is necessary. Maybe because of the implications of climate change, or because they've seen density work well in their neighbourhood before with design and amenities and vitality, or because they want the chance to build a mortgage-helper unit above the garage or a coach house for their kids so they can stay in the neighbourhood. They see change as a way to protect or improve their livability, and help with affordability and they tell us so. The status quo isn't working for them. 

They want it to be done the right way, with beautiful, green design and strong eco-performance technologies. They don't want towers everywhere, not in the middle of single family residential blocks to be sure, but are interested in discussing other kinds of density, what we've called "gentle, hidden or invisible density" (although these are admittedly very subjective terms) like row houses, basement suites or lane-housing such as coach houses or rental "fonzi-suites" above garages, that keep a single family scale to their block. Many are seeing their single family neighbourhood changing anyway, with older character houses being torn down for larger single family houses that could have had green, less expensive units within them, but didn't. 

They want it done for the right reasons, with a reasonable amount of the "windfall" of the land value lift landing in community benefits and green performance, not just in the profit lines of developments (even though often much of the profit has been realized by the seller of land to developers in the past, not to the developers themselves). We've messaged this to developers, suggesting they wait and see what Council expects in return to make the density work before they pay too much for land. 

Many Vancouverites speak of a different price – the price of inaction, of not avoiding or being ready for the consequences of climate change and the end of cheap energy. They say we can't pretend we don't know that change will occur to North American cities, faster than it has in the past, whether we want it to or not. Those changes are already bringing big costs. They expect us not to wait and react, but to plan and manage.  

These neighbours mirror the message we're hearing from experts and scientists in our own community and beyond, who are helping us measure how density by itself is indeed "eco", in that it substantially decreases our eco-impacts through both transportation and building energy. But clearly, when density is combined with and enables green technology such as district energy, the ecological benefits are truly powerful. Thankfully learned individuals like the University of British Columbia's Dr. William Rees (internationally famous as the inventor of the ecological footprint concept), have been advisors to us throughout this process. 

In particular, young people are telling us they want us to do better. It is truly sobering to have young Vancouverites passionately tell us we haven't done enough to ensure their quality of life, their livability. They may be the most aware of the generations around climate change, perhaps because they will be living with the consequences – the price - much longer than we. And in the immediate sense, they tell us they have too few places to live, particularly affordable/flexible rental and ownership options. 

There are many perspectives, many voices, in this interesting civic discussion, and we're not done listening.  

The next step began last week with the presenting of the draft "EcoDensity Charter" and initial ideas for action to Council, for discussion and referral to a special council meeting at the end of February next year. We'll be spending the next three months listening to the public's thoughts on the drafts, which are far from "written in stone".  

For those of you working through density discussions of your own, I'd love to hear your comments, and your own approaches, case studies and anecdotes.

Brent Toderian is an international consultant on advanced urbanism with TODERIAN UrbanWORKS, Vancouver’s former Director of City Planning, and the President of the Council for Canadian Urbanism. Follow him on Twitter @BrentToderian




Kindly keep your "eco-density" concept in Vancouver and stop exporting it to other cities like Kelowna, as it is just a greened excuse for urban cramming and all the problems that high density living brings with it.


a greened excuse for urban cramming and all the problems that high density living brings with it.

What about all the problems with the uncramming that goes with the McMansioning going on up and down the Okanagan?



Human-scaled density

That's pretty funny.

The human scale architecture you seem to be advocating for would be called density by most Americans.

Density doesn't have to be high-rise.


Hey Brent,

Consider me one of the young people engaged in the process so far. I've been a big fan of eco-density since the initiative launched last year, but I'm starting to have some doubts.

My biggest concern is this will become a framework selectively applied by city council when it suits their whims. Already we have a policy of putting pedestrians and cyclists before cars, but I rarely see it followed in planning decisions. The decisions to scrap the bike lane trial on the Burrard Bridge was a perfect example of the dominant position cars have.

Maybe I'm getting cynical after city council voted to allow box stores on Marine Drive. How exactly does that fit with eco-density?

A lot of what I see so far in the Eco-Density Charter is focused around new construction. How about some ideas that aren't building focused. Like encouraging clothes lines, supporting car sharing, creating urban gardens, developing a bike sharing program, or starting a green bin program. I heard a lot about these during the planning stages, but nothing in the latest documents. I think policy changes like these would be beneficial and show people this isn't just about lining the pockets of developers.

Prepare for the AICP* Exam

Join the thousands of students who have utilized the Planetizen AICP* Exam Preparation Class to prepare for the American Planning Association's AICP* exam.
Starting at $245

Essential Readings in Urban Planning

Planning on taking the AICP* Exam? Register for Planetizen's AICP * Exam Preparation Course to save $25.
Melissa and Doug Town Blocks Wooden Play Set

Block play meets role play

New! Town block set from Melissa and Doug Toys
Book cover of Where Things Are from Near to Far

Where Things Are From Near to Far

This engaging children's book about planning illustrates that "every building has its place."